It was won for all but three years by the Conservative candidate, the exception being the years 1906-1909 when that party, as a fellow Unionist party against Irish Home Rule and other devolution in a spell of widespread popular decline held a general meeting endorsing instead H. O. Arnold-Forster, a Liberal Unionist. His 3.2% victory against the candidate of the rest of the Liberal Party coupled with a 20.2% performance for Labour in Croydon which coincided with a Liberal landslide — the First Asquith ministry which brought in the fundamental constitutional reform of the Parliament Act 1911 after the delay for "the People's Budget" to be implemented.[1] He died in 1909 causing a by-election and his party, with its occasional candidates in the region, no longer stood for the Croydon seat nor its north–south successors after 1918. The Labour party fielded a candidate for the second time in the 1909 by-election, polling badly, winning about a fifth of the 1906 vote; the party fielded none in the 1910 elections for this seat.
This seat was covered an area based on the town of Croydon. Croydon had been a Municipal Borough from 1883 and was to become a County Borough in 1889. By 1902, at the latest, the parliamentary and local government boroughs had the same boundaries.
The Royal Commission on London Traffic, which reported in 1906, included the borough in its definition of Greater London. It was throughout in the north-east of Surrey. Its area has been included in Greater London since 1965.
The 1906 election saw for the first time a majority of seats in London's metropolitan area align with the Liberal party; the Liberal Unionist candidate here was a compromise reached by the Conservatives and non-Home Rule for Ireland Liberals calculated to prevent a loss to a Liberal candidate.
The constituency was close enough to London and built-up enough to be considered part of a greater London or "Metropolitan" area.
A large part of the inhabitants of this constituency commuted to work in the City of London. It was however an area where attendance at Nonconformist chapels exceeded that at Anglican churches, according to the Daily News survey of 1902. By the time of the 1911 census more factories had been set up and a large artisan population had moved in so its core and north in particular was decidedly lower-income working-class.
The constituency was in general Conservative, but less strongly so than many suburban commuter seats around London. The Labour Party secured 20% of the vote, in a three-way contest, in the 1906 election.
Borough rather than a County seat
The seat being a parliamentary borough made for a lower level of election expenses permissible and the usual office/status for the returning officer.
Another General Election was required to take place before the end of 1915. The political parties had been making preparations for an election to take place and by July 1914, the following candidates had been selected;
^ abThe change (swing) figures here are contrasting the by-election in the previous year, breaking with convention as the last party who stood at a General Election, some four years before, was the co-ticket of the Liberal Unionists and Conservatives, a Liberal Unionist rather than a Conservative; furthermore the Liberal Party only altered its vote between that general election and the by-election by 0.1% making use of the by-election statistics much fairer and informative to the two candidates making up the new slate/field.
Boundaries of Parliamentary Constituencies 1885-1972, compiled and edited by F.W.S. Craig (Parliamentary Reference Publications 1972)
British Parliamentary Election Results 1885-1918, compiled and edited by F.W.S. Craig (Macmillan Press 1974)
Social Geography of British Elections 1885-1910. by Henry Pelling (Macmillan 1967)
Who's Who of British Members of Parliament, Volume II 1886-1918, edited by M. Stenton and S. Lees (Harvester Press 1978)
Who's Who of British Members of Parliament, Volume III 1919-1945, edited by M. Stenton and S. Lees (Harvester Press 1979)
.svg)
